clinton hitler putin site:abc.net.au/
10 years ago
2009-02-28
well, look what the cat dragged in!
[critical update - attempt to g00se the g00gleb0t...]
DNP:Fiona:Racist and abusive Keep it up
Submitted by Ernest William ... on February 28, 2009 - 6:44pm.
Eliot Ramsey: "In every Muslim country surveyed, overwhelming or near unanimous majorities expressed negative views toward Jews. The figure reached 99 percent in Jordan, 98 percent in Egypt and 94 percent in Pakistan. Twenty-eight percent of Jordanians and 22 percent of Egyptians volunteered that "Jews" were to blame for bad relations between Muslims and the West, although Jews were not mentioned in the question."
The survey, according to you, was done on the population of those countries. What makes you think that they are all Muslims?
And in any case - how surprising. Why would the Jews be unpopular in the Middle East when they have considered themselves as different since the beginning of their religion - or is that a race?For some unknown reason to me, new Israel classifies itself as "western" and is so considered by the Arab nations of the middle east.Bearing in mind that the history of the nomadic tribes of the Arabian Desert who evolved into the Jews of today, I find that fascinating.The east is east and the west is west and never the twain shall meet.Just one more point Eliot, if I was Jewish I would never want you to defend me.NE OUBLIE.
DNP is their code for 'Do no publish.' That censoring from Reynolds comes on top of this sort of s**t editorialising from Tonkin:
Fair dinkum Alan. in Gaza Media Statement
by Ernest William ... on February 26, 2009 - 9:52pm
...
Richard: Ernest, your work that hasn't been published has been considered by editors to be racist, abusive, or containing-despite requests- unsourced extracts. Implications that anything more sinister is afoot do little for your perceived credibility.
Ethics? What ethics? Credibility? Whose credibility?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Phil, to visit the old WD and see what it's become is depressing.
ReplyDeleteWhy Ernest and Marylin and a few others bother is beyond my comprehension. The Ramsey/Curran/Pahoff clique just stirs and the so-called moderators just expose their biases and poor judgment.
There are too many good blogs around for people to continue to waste their time trying to bring back what used to be.
WD's use-by date has long gone!
If WD was "Accountable" and "Transparent" then Fiona Reynolds would fully account for her judgement and explain exactly what is, in her view, deemed to be "racist" or "abusive" in what Ernest William said.
ReplyDeleteI see that he has said, by implication through his questions, that:
1) "Eliot Ramsey" has attempted to demonise Muslims.
Then, in statements, he essentially says:
2) He doesn't understand why Israel classifies itself as "Western," nor why the nations in its neighbourhood do so as well, when many of its people have origins that are not "Western."
3) He would never want "Eliot Ramsey" to speak in his defence if he (Ernest William) were a Jew.
I'm told that I'm a reasonable, intelligent person and I cannot see any "racist" or "abusive" content in that comment by Ernest William.
Can anyone else explain it? What could Fiona Reynolds have deemed "racist" and "abusive" in Ernest William's comment?
G'day David and Orana. I can't see what Fiona could have deemed "racist" or "offensive" in Ernest's post, but as we learned from her response to my question about apparent inconsistencies in the treatment some people as opposed to others, she might have reasons. The public are not to be told what these reasons are, if they exist. I raised the matter of inconsistencies again last night - this time on what constitutes "off-topic". Fiona had decreed that Ernest's comments about the ancient history of Palestine were off-topic in a thread about Gaza yet we have seen others raise Australian domestic politics and matters pertaining to Cambodia without editorial comment. As yet my post has not been published let alone an explanation provided. Another example of how WD is accountable. Or not.
ReplyDeleteRT writing about credibility is such a hoot.
Indeed, Graeme. I did notice that incredible application of (double) editorial standards this past week.
ReplyDeleteA person who will judge discussion of the history of relations between peoples in the Mid-East as "off-topic" in a conversation about the Israeli attacks on the people living in Gaza, and then also judge discussion of who did or didn't aid Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge as "on-topic" in that same conversation, is well described as an incredible judge.
And not just this past week, Orana. But it is has been a week marked by notable examples. To target Ern for posting racist comments given the history of Alan Curran's quite vile comments about Palestinians is grotesque. Given that some of Curran's comments have seemed to support the wiping out the Palestinians, the latitude he is given is odd, to say the least.
ReplyDeleteYes. Though it should be noted that "Alan Curran" is a pseudonym used by a racist man too timid to put legal name to his racist and abusive commments.
ReplyDeleteI've no issue with pseudonymity; it has its place and is not problematic per se. However, when used to enable lies and bigotry it certainly is problematic (for just about everyone other than the current un-ethical WD mgmt team).
In the end, David G is entirely correct.
ReplyDeleteIn the WD community of days now long gone there was more than one who'd now be putting the challenging questions to the cowardly "Alan Curran" about sacking workers to feather his own nest. Alas, in the waste of space WD of today, no-one even mentions that 'Akka' is a gutless, heartless, greedy sacker, who killed the jobs of Australians so that he could lazily waste his days submitting his racist views for publication by WD's unethical mgmt.
I went looking for the 3rd joke below, to check that I had it right and give a link. I found it a few times, variously attributed to Shaw or Wilde, but perhaps it really was Churchill, since I found two others that seem to belong together:
ReplyDeleteBessie Braddock
"Sir, you're drunk!"
Winston Churchill
"Yes, Madam, I am. But in the morning, I will be sober and you will still be ugly."
Lady Astor: "Winston, if I were your wife I'd put poison in your coffee."
Winston: "Nancy, if I were your husband I'd drink it."
Churchill: Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?
Socialite: My goodness, Mr. Churchill... Well, I suppose... we would have to discuss terms, of course...
Churchill: Would you sleep with me for five pounds?
Socialite: Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!
Churchill: Madam, we've already established that. Now we are haggling about the price.
Sooo, what we've got is ugly, poison and whores - a fair description of the management 'over there.'
It should be pointed out that the DNP-ed comment was made available by a sharp-eyed reader, who saw it and had the presence of mind to get a copy before it disappeared - which it did, and quickly.
It should also be pointed out that from what we have seen from Ernest over time is fair, decent and honest commentary - until the penny dropped for him about filthy Israeli state terrorism; murder to steal Palestinian land etc. - the whole ghastly 60+ year show. In writing his comments, he would have - as we can see by the DNP-ed sample - have tried to stay within the guidelines - that's just him, and then even more so, after the DNPs started coming at him. I can understand Ernest's reaction quite well, since I was myself duped by the constant stream of pro-Israel lying propaganda dribbled out to us - via the AusBC, say - traitors! The AusBC have violated the implicit trust placed in them by the Australian people.
The DNP-ed comment came right at the end of the month, and if 'the great majority of those were from Ernest,' it could amount to an average of about one per day for the month. We saw evidence of Ern's frustration; he - like far too many others - is an addict, so he perseveres in trying to make his point and get it published. We can see that the DNP-ed post is not at all as Reynolds, Roffey & Tonkin have alleged: "racist, abusive, content-free or incomprehensible or over quota," so we have to consider some other motive for so cowardly smacking poor Ernest in the chops. That's what's known as an abuse of power, it's also pro-criminal, so is itself criminal via the accessory mechanism. Boo! Hiss! Ugly, poisonous web-whores!
Move on; nothing to see; nothing new here.
IDH, those lines are often attributed to Churchill but there's no confirmation I can find. Still, there are some rippers in there and in the same vein...
ReplyDeleteThanks D,
ReplyDeletehad a quick look; lots in there so I didn't read it all, but two unsourced snips caught my eye:
«It is the habit of the boa constrictor to besmear the body of his victim with a foul slime before he devours it; and there are many people in England, and perhaps elsewhere, who seem to be unable to contemplate military operations for clear political objects, unless they can cajole themselves into the belief that their enemy are utterly and hopelessly vile… This may be very comforting to philanthropic persons at home; but when an army in the field becomes imbued with the idea that the enemy are vermin who cumber the earth, instances of barbarity may very easily be the outcome. This unmeasured condemnation is moreover as unjust as it is dangerous and unnecessary. »
My comment: Think 'Islamofascism,' 'radical' Hamas, 'extremist' Palestinians - the dark list of demonisations of US and Israeli intended victims, most often Muslims, is long and disgraceful. We get massacres, like Iraq (2003+, 1mio+ dead), or Gaza (2008/9, 1300+ slaughtered). Then:
«If you are going through hell, keep going.»
My comment: I was a bit surprised (but not very), to find out that Churchill has been quoted as having suggested using poison gas on the 'natives' in what we now know as Iraq. («I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes.»; poor hapless buggers, who'd wish to be born over an oil-lake?) IMHO war/violence is invalid as a problem-solving method; our so-called 'leaders' should be just a bit smarter than that - eh? So a final quote:
«To jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war.»
Too bad that's far, far too often honoured - in the breach.
Already happened:
ReplyDeleteWeb Results 1 - 30 of 64 English and German pages from abc.net.au/unleashed for
"Eliot Ramsey". (0.39 secs)
More to the point here - and who gives a s**t about lying blog-trolls anyway, but what idiot would care if Pauline bloody Hanson stood for and won Prime Miniscule of Aus? Politics is nothing but an obscene game; with the thoroughly, purposefully and even partly self- dumbed-down electorate, outright traitors as candidates, all immersed in filthy propaganda, also spread via and with active cooperation/assistance from the publicly financed broadcasters? Bah! MK herself is an intimate part of the problems.
ReplyDeleteYes, IDH, I do see what you mean about MK's grasping for relevance.
ReplyDeleteMK's grasping for relevance by trying to start a conversation about another woman from QLD grasping for relevance! And I'd decided that other woman is so utterly irrelevant that I'd not even uttered her name.
ReplyDeletelook over there! ...
ReplyDelete.. a convenient distraction! ...
.. young schoolgirls play it, Q: Why can't MK?
-=*=-
A: Because MK claims to be a so-called 'profi,' from her 'own' website: "Independent, Ethical, Accountable and Transparent" (and Milligan told us that one cannot argue with facts like that!)
Well, yes one can. The real facts are as in my headline article; Reynolds censored what looks like a totally inoffensive comment, and gave the lies "Racist and abusive" as her risible 'excuse.'
Normally, such lies, as the censored comment itself, would not appear, the comment would simply land in the bit-bucket. So much for "Ethical, Accountable and Transparent," leaving just "Independent."
It was once admitted (proof available) that MK was threatened. In another attempt at self-justification, Reynolds has claimed unspecified reasons which she refuses to divulge, i.e. that she knows some secret. (How does that I, E, A & T go again?)
Comment: Only criminal thugs threaten, and one goes to the cops - one doesn't just cowardly cave in.
That the censorship demonstrated is clearly to the benefit of a certain group/ideology and that that group/ideology clearly gets a better run than it deserves 'over there' accounts for their so-called "Independence" - actually, of course, their almost complete and utter lack thereof. Note that the management's behaviour is not merely web-whoring, but they give active support to a certain group/ideology that many consider not just wrong but Nuremberg-class criminal.
As well as grasping for relevance, MK could grasp for credibility - or at least remove her name from the gruesome parody which that site has long since become.
Even post Gaza, the world has a problem.
ReplyDeleteI have no doubt that the Zionists have no legal or moral right to the lands they have stolen from the Palestinians or to those that they will steal from if not stopped.
I believe that the situation can only be fairly resolved by the government of the so-called state of Israel being handed over to the Palestinian authority and returned to the peaceful co-existence that previously existed.
The Zionists would not allow a democratic vote and even if one was orchestrated, US style, the gun at the head of the voters would ensure a Zionist victory.
So, voting is out of the question.
The only resolution that I believe the Zionists want is total capitulation by the owners of those lands and peace on their terms. Remember Hitler's methods?
I have repeatedly asked why Jews are generally disliked all over the world, and been ignored or censored.
When that happens, one must reach one's own conclusions and these are mine.
The teachings of the Zionists are brutal in the extreme to anyone of any other race or religion. Their belief in their right to rule is ingrained to a point where they can accept nothing less. Commonly called control freaks, people cannot be expected to ignore that the ordinary working Zionist Jew is almost impossible to find.
Why - we can't ask why because it is still taboo - why?
It is apparent that the ancient stories of Midas and Shylock must have had a strong influence on the "gentiles". Where there is wealth - where there is financial power - where there is big business CEO's - there are certainly Zionist Jews.
Why are the Jewish people picked on? Is it because they have the wealth of the nations under their control? Why do some South American governments jail people who criticise the holocaust? Why does Webdiary disallow it? Where does this power come from and why?
The world has to realise that it is obvious - if they are given an inch they will take a mile.
Let's hope that the Palestinians are not going to be the scapegoats for the western countries who do not want Jews living there. Just a dumping ground with sufficient military might to invade, bomb or shell any nation in the immediate vicinity.
Do I personally hate Jews? No I don't but, perhaps I would like them more if they were not under the extreme cult called Zionism.
King David made an error when he captured Jebus and conciliated with the cult from Mount Zion. But that is history.
NE OUBLIE.
G'day Ernest W,
ReplyDeletenice to 'see' you, and welcome.
http://informationclearinghouse.info/article22108.htm
ReplyDeleteThis article was reprinted in the "Information Clearing House" February 26, 2009. The following is a Summary printed by myself.
"As the Arabs See The Jews"
His Majesty King Abdullah.
The American Magazine November, 1947.
"This fascinating essay, written by King Hussein's grandfather King Abdullah, appeared in the United States six months before the 1948 Arab-Israeli War. In the article, King Abdullah disputes the mistaken view that the Arab opposition to Zionism (and later the state of Israel) is because of longstanding religious or ethnic hatred. He notes that Jews and Muslims enjoyed a long history of peaceful coexistence in the Middle East, and that Jews have historically suffered far more at the hands of Christian Europe. Pointing to the tragedy of the holocaust that Jews suffered during Word War II, the monarch asks why America and Europe are refusing to accept more than a token handful of Jewish immigrants and refugees. It is unfair, he argues, to make Palestine, which is innocent of anti-Semitism, pay for the crimes of Europe. King Abdullah also asks how Jews can claim a historic right to Palestine, when Arabs have been the overwhelming majority there for nearly 1300 uninterrupted years? The essay ends on an ominous note, warning of dire consequences if a peaceful solution cannot be found to protect the rights of the indigenous Arabs of Palestine." End of quote.
COMMENT. How prophetic this was. The entire text can be found on the web address above.
NE OUBLIE.
And it's G'day Erm from me.
ReplyDeleteIt is not the Holocaust that is to be questioned but rather the use that has been made of it. King Abdullah raised very pertinent points about the Palestinians suffering for European crimes and of Jewish rights to Palestine. On the latter, the O T is not necessarily accurate as to the historical record, some consider that the texts, written centuries after the events they "described", gilded the lily. A complex area of of investigation.
Apologies for the typo, Ern.
ReplyDeleteUS Secretary of State criticises Israel.
ReplyDeleteUS Secretary of State Hillary Clinton criticised Israel's plans to demolish more than 80 Palestinian homes in East Jerusalem as "unhelpful" and a violation of its international obligations.
In the first public rebuke of a specific Israeli policy since the new US administration took office, Mrs Clinton indicated the plan contravened the provisions in the five-year-old internationally agreed "road-map" that calls for a halt to all settlement activity.
"unhelpful" - too say the least but what will the US do about it? Anything?
The story is part of the latest from Juan Cole to be found here.
Vanunu doesn't want Nobel Prize ... but why not?
Israel's nuclear whistleblower Mordechai Vanunu requested on Thursday for his name to be removed from a shortlist of candidates for the Nobel Peace Prize because President Shimon Peres had received the award.
Vanunu said in a letter to the Norwegian Nobel Committee that he did not wish "to belong to a list of laureates that also includes [President] Shimon Peres, the man behind Israeli atomic policy."
...
Vanunu added: "Peres established the reactor in Dimona and developed Israel's nuclear weapons program... In the same way as Pakistan's [nuclear scientist] Dr. Khan, Peres was the man behind the proliferation of nuclear weapons in South Africa and other states. He was also behind the nuclear test in South America in 1978."
He might have mentioned Kissinger as well.
Ern, congratulations. I've watched you struggling over at WD for some time and I've admired your determination in the face of great odds which not only included other 'commenters' but the 'management' as well.
ReplyDeleteOn Phil's blog you'll find things different. Very different.
Did not take long to find a comment on Clinton's "unhelpful" - and other matters.
ReplyDeleteIt was almost dreamlike, watching Secretary of State Clinton make her visit to Israel, one that can be called the first of many trips pretending to encourage peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians. It’s a dream I’ve had several times over; one needs only to simply fill in the names of the various U.S. Secretaries of State, say that they’ve met with the Israeli leadership and with Mahmoud Abbas, (who is about as popular with the Palestinians as Rush Limbaugh is with Democrats), and that no progress was made.
Aside from saying that Abbas heads the only legitimate government of Palestine, Mrs. Clinton did say that the building of new settlements was, “unhelpful,” or maybe it was the demolition of several Palestinian apartment blocks in Jerusalem that was unhelpful. It’s hard to remember which one did not help. She did conveniently forget that Abbas’ term as President of the Palestinian Authority has expired, and she also forgot that Hamas won the Parliamentary elections big time. It’s not that the Parliament has been meeting regularly, mostly because Israel arrested most of the Hamas members of Parliament, all of them still behind bars. It was the kind of election that the U.S. did not believe iin. It was legal, and showed the preferences of the Palestinian public, something which the U.S. chose to ignore.
Other matters dealt with are Syria - where the Crawford Caligula's approach was most unhelpful - arms supplies and other double standards.
Stephen Zunes on US military aid to Israel- which is to continue.
In the wake of Israel's massive assault on heavily populated civilian areas of the Gaza Strip earlier this year, Amnesty International called for the United States to suspend military aid to Israel on human rights grounds. Amnesty has also called for the United Nations to impose a mandatory arms embargo on both Hamas and the Israeli government. Unfortunately, it appears that President Barack Obama won't be heeding Amnesty's call.
During the fighting in January, Amnesty documented Israeli forces engaging in "direct attacks on civilians and civilian objects in Gaza, and attacks which were disproportionate or indiscriminate." The leader of Amnesty International's fact-finding mission to the Gaza Strip and southern Israel noted how "Israeli forces used white phosphorus and other weapons supplied by the USA to carry out serious violations of international humanitarian law, including war crimes." Amnesty also reported finding fragments of U.S.-made munitions "littering school playgrounds, in hospitals and in people's homes."
Malcolm Smart, who serves as Amnesty International's director for the Middle East, observed in a press release that "to a large extent, Israel's military offensive in Gaza was carried out with weapons, munitions and military equipment supplied by the USA and paid for with U.S. taxpayers' money." The release also noted how before the conflict, which raged for three weeks from late December into January, the United States had "been aware of the pattern of repeated misuse of [its] weapons."
The response:
Obama's refusal to accept Amnesty's call for the suspension of military assistance was a blow to human rights activists. The most Obama might do to express his displeasure toward controversial Israeli policies like the expansion of illegal settlements in the occupied territories would be to reject a planned increase in military aid for the next fiscal year and slightly reduce economic aid and/or loan guarantees. However, in a notable departure from previous administrations, Obama made no mention of any military aid to Israel in his outline of the FY 2010 budget, announced last week. This notable absence may indicate that pressure from human rights activists and others concerned about massive U.S. military aid to Israel is now strong enough that the White House feels a need to downplay the assistance rather than emphasize it.
We've seem Clinton express some displeasure, but read on.
The usual suspects disapprove of the newly appointed chairman of the NIC.
The NIC is the U.S. intelligence community's (IC) center for mid- and long-term strategic thinking and analysis on a range of issues facing the United States. Among other responsibilities, it produces National Intelligence Estimates (NIEs) – the consensus judgments of all 16 intelligence agencies – regarding the likely course of future events.
In Dec 2007, for example, it published an NIE that found that Iran had stopped work on one key component of nuclear-weapons development in 2003, a finding that frustrated efforts by Iran to rally public support for military strikes against Iran's nuclear facilities before Bush left office.
Freeman has been an outspoken critic both of the Bush administration's "global war on terror" and of Israeli policies in the occupied territories. In a 2007 speech, he denounced U.S. support for "Israel's efforts to pacify its captive and increasingly ghettoized Arab populations (and) …seize ever more Arab land for its colonists," and warned that Israel would soon face "an unwelcome choice between a democratic society and a Jewish identity for their state."
The campaign against Freeman began shortly after rumors of his appointment surfaced two weeks ago. It was initially confined to neoconservative media organs such as the Weekly Standard and Commentary magazines, as well as liberal but hawkishly pro-Israel figures such as Martin Peretz, editor of The New Republic.
Steve Rosen, a former staffer at the powerful America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) who is now facing trial for passing classified information to the Israeli government, played a leading role in denouncing Freeman's appointment, accusing him of "old-line Arabism" and of having "an extremely close relationship" with Saudi Arabia.
Rosen obviously sees nothing wrong with a close relationship with Israel - others seem to consider his a little too close.
Still learning.
ReplyDeleteThanks to all those who have welcomed me to this forum and for their understanding of my efforts.
I like the comfort I feel when contributing here and also when I submit to Your Democracy.
Is there any worry about duplication because both seem to be upholding the principles of freedom of speech?
G'day Ernest W,
ReplyDeleteI think any successful 'truth seeker' is always learning, especially since there's sooo much stuff they've lied to us about. It wasn't *just* the vile B, B & H - but they are the recent most wicked. It turns out that the lies go back to before WW2, try looking at this article which I cited recently in my "'little' financial bombshell ... "
When it comes to the nasty 'little' business in and around Israel (aka murder for land and water), we now know that we've been lied to consistently for 60+ years - by the Zionists, their (corrupt) politician 'sock-puppets,' all via and actively assisted by the (venal) MSM, including, to their ever-lasting damnation, some publicly financed broadcasters - the AusBC being one, SBS the other just in Aus. Such publicly financed broadcaster chicanery is not restricted to Aus, one wonders how they have the bloody nerve - but that's our business to research such villainy then expose it.
As to submitting in more than one forum, there's absolutely no reason why not to - except that you may not get an ideal run over at "Your Democracy" - since it's run by essentially the same crew as where you've had your recent tribulations.
As for technical details, you may become an author to this blog if you wish and go on to write your own headline articles, just say so and I'll send you an invite via your eml@ - you know that I can access it if (but only if) you so decide. Apropos any blogging know-how, feel *totally free* to ask; it's what we are in here - libre = free. (Lying trolls may not find us quite so free.)
G'day IDHolm,
ReplyDeleteWhile we all have to accept that in a "free speech" society, the media can virtually do as they like, nevertheless I have always believed that their power of uncontrolled persuasion either elects governments or has them dismissed.
A wise WD contributor once called voters "sheople"! Superb.
How very true. I give as examples the demise of Gough Whitlam by Sir Frank Packer and the re-election of the faulty Howard mob by Murdoch in 1998.
I have noted that when people are truly allowed to speak their minds, without biased censorship, a lot can be learned about what the public actually believes - not by what they are told to believe.
I wonder ID how many wars and consequential murders could have been avoided if the people who were expected to die, no matter what the outcome was, actually knew the true facts?
I know I am geting carried away, but the ancient vice of might is right is only an extension and a massive support for, extreme capitalism which will destroy us all.
There is always an alternative to suicide?
NE OUBLIE.
what 'progressives' just don't get ...
ReplyDelete.. and sadly perhaps never, ever will ...
.. is that propagandists are not interested in 'the facts'
-=*=-
1. Fact: Immoral might is *never* right, how could it possibly be? [On yer, Ern!]
It might 'prevail' - enabling theft, pillage, looting, plunder and rapine - as we see in Iraq, and all around Israel for 60+ long and bloody years.
2. Fact: All that 'conversing' with the likes of P. H. Dancer, S. J. Overseas and P. G. Norant (not to mention Eve L. & K. T. A. Ziothug) does, is to enable such liars to continue pushing their corrupt and bankrupt barrows.
Proof: As good as no visible progress 'over there' over any timescale.
Tip: (a) Identify propaganda, (b) point it out, thereafter (c) totally ignore.
All this eternal, ineffective bickering with trolls is self-indulgent fiddling while Rome burns.
-=*=-
PS Very prescient, Ern: "how many wars and consequential murders could have been avoided if ..." Of course, that is the idea behind pro-war propaganda, as in perhaps the most famous such quote: Göring: Why, of course, the people don't want war... That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country. - and carried forth Oh, so adroitly by B, B & H...
[This comment based on the original impulse which became my new what you see ...]
A follow up by Juan Cole to the Freeman appointment kerfuffle ... beware the bullyboys.
ReplyDeleteHow powerful are the Zionists?
ReplyDeleteThe similarities between the beginning of the Third Reich and the Zionist' new Israel is astonishing.
Once the Nazis were powerful enough to vent their anger over the Versailles Treaty (substitute the holocaust) which they did. But they did it cunningly through Poland - "we have a right to defend ourselves". Remember?
As ID reminds us the principles (even if that is a nasty word to the Zionists) of both the Nazis and the Zionists resonate with the words of Goring: "Why, of course, the people don't want war... That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country." Shades of Bush; Blair and Howard!
And just what is the spiel of the Zionists - "We have a right to defend ourselves" or as Gus Leonisky posted in Your Democracy as imagined from the Zionists Livni; Olmert and Barak the words: "Israel has the Reich to defend itself"!
Bob informs us that Freeman withdrew from being involved in the ridiculous 1,000th effort to bring peace to the Middle East with the Zionists the most powerful military power in the area and continuing to be the illegal and immoral murderers of an innocent and militarily childish people.
The more I learn the more disgusted I become with the "Israel lobby" and the US Administration.
Now that the Bush/Zionist coalition has made the free world a captive of their powers that be - we are entering into a tragedy of immense proportions - today in the Middle East - tomorrow? The US has 40.3% of the world Jewry while new Israel has 40.6%. Is this an indication of what they claim the Zionist God has commanded?
The world must realise that the Zionists already control America's major media and the T/V industry - so to overcome that the non-Jews would have to - what?
History repeats and repeats.
NE OUBLIE.
The truth and reality.
ReplyDeleteHis Majesty King Abdullah stated in 1947:
"I am especially delighted to address an American audience, for the tragic problem of Palestine will never be solved without American understanding, American sympathy, American support."
That is the truth.
Two days after the Zionists declared themselves to be the State of Israel - the Americans accepted them and from that time, have supplied them with the technology; training; weapons and even nuclear capability. To defend themselves?
That is the reality.
So, having already created two nuclear powered monsters in Afro-Asia namely Pakistan and India - whose religions caused their separation - the Americans now have placed a nuclear powered monster in the middle of the Middle East - new Israel!
To try to understand the US foreign policies one would have to start with the fact that they depend on war - somewhere - anywhere but, it must supply the Military/Corporate.
It is a statistical fact that they make a profit from them all - no matter who wins.
Is it reasonable then to conclude that their most militarily superior partner in new Israel will continue to produce instability but with profit?
History has told us that the Jewish race/religion is consumed with wealth and power - what better place than the greedy war-obligated military corporate of America?
In his farewell speech in 1961 President Eisenhower said this in part: "We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations."
"This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society."
"In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military/industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."
"We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defence with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."
Amen. This post has been cross-posted to http://yourdemocracy.net.au/ and http://webdiary.com.au/
NE OUBLIE.
G'day Ern, the machinations of the lobby have been exposed over the Charles Freeman affair - as bad as the outcome seems, some see it in another light.
ReplyDeleteJustin Raimondo.
The nixing of Charles "Chas" Freeman from a post as head of the National Intelligence Council is not, as is commonly averred, a victory for the Israel lobby. It is, instead, a Pyrrhic victory – that is, a victory so costly that it really amounts to a defeat for them. Sure, they managed to keep out a trenchant critic of their Israel-centric and grossly distorted view of a proper American foreign policy, and, yes, they managed to smear him and put others on notice that someone with his views is radioactive, as far as a high-level job in the foreign policy establishment is concerned. And yet – and yet ….
They – the Lobby – have now been forced out in the open. "A lobby," says Steve Rosen, the ringleader of the "get Freeman" lynch mob, "is like a night flower: it thrives in the dark and dies in the sun." If so, then the Israel lobby is slated for oblivion, because as frenetically – and pathetically – as they tried to mask the centrality of their involvement, and as much as they tried to make this about other issues (his alleged ties to Saudi Arabia, his supposed views on China), everybody knows it was really all about Israel and Freeman's contemptuous view of the "special relationship" which requires us giving Tel Aviv a blank check, moral as well as monetary. As a foreign policy realist, he thinks we ought to put our own interests first, in the Middle East and elsewhere, not those of a foreign country, no matter how much political clout – and campaign cash – its American fifth column can muster.
And Tom Engelhardt presents Robert Dreyfuss on the issue.
One of the internal links os to Steve Rosen's blog for examples of Rosen's criticism of Freeman. Here is one:
Here is a sample of his views on Israel, from his Remarks to the National Council on US-Arab Relations on September 12, 2005: "As long as the United States continues unconditionally to provide the subsidies and political protection that make the Israeli occupation and the high-handed and self-defeating policies it engenders possible, there is little, if any, reason to hope that anything resembling the former peace process can be resurrected. Israeli occupation and settlement of Arab lands is inherently violent. ...And as long as such Israeli violence against Palestinians continues, it is utterly unrealistic to expect that Palestinians will stand down from violent resistance and retaliation against Israelis. Mr. Sharon is far from a stupid man; he understands this. So, when he sets the complete absence of Palestinian violence as a precondition for implementing the road map or any other negotiating process, he is deliberately setting a precondition he knows can never be met."
I suggest that Freeman was entirely accurate in his assessment and is supported by the historical record. However, truth is something the lobby has little regard for.
Back to Dreyfuss:
The Israel lobby has regularly denied its own existence even as it has long carried on with its work, in stealth as in the bright sunlight. In retrospect, however, l'affaire Freeman may prove a game changer. It has already sparked a new, more intense mainstream focus on the lobby, one that far surpasses the flap that began in March, 2006, over the publication of an essay by John Mearsheimer and Steven Walt in the London Review of Books that was, in 2007, expanded into a book, The Israel Lobby. In fact, one of the sins committed by Freeman, according to his critics, is that an organization he headed, the Middle East Policy Council, published an early version of the Mearsheimer-Walt thesis -- which argued that a powerful, pro-Israel coalition exercises undue influence over American policymakers -- in its journal.
In his blog at Foreign Policy, Walt reacted to Freeman's decision to withdraw by writing:
"For all of you out there who may have questioned whether there was a powerful 'Israel lobby,' or who admitted that it existed but didn't think it had much influence, or who thought that the real problem was some supposedly all-powerful 'Saudi lobby,' think again."
I recommend the material I have linked on this issue - especially to the cowed and craven. You know who you are.
G'day Bob,
ReplyDeleteGreat post mate - keep it up. I am still trying to topple the "Israeli wall" in Webdiary.
Cheers Ern. G.
G'day Ern, glad to be of assistance. Here's Juan Cole on the issue. Somewhat different take re exposure of the lobby but note the Iran factor.
ReplyDeleteAs to battling away at the other place- best of luck.
Power corrupts and absolute power.....?
ReplyDeleteI am thankful at the "wake up" call we are all having in the civilised world concerning the frightening power of the Zionist Lobby in the US - especially in foreign policies.
At this site http://www.fpif.org/fpifxt/5923 I found an entry that should have been one of the many warnings we have had with this subject.
I quote just part of that article:
"In the wake of Israel's massive assault on heavily populated civilian areas of the Gaza Strip earlier this year, Amnesty International called for the United States to suspend military aid to Israel on human rights grounds. Amnesty has also called for the United Nations to impose a mandatory arms embargo on both Hamas and the Israeli government. Unfortunately, it appears that President Barack Obama won't be heeding Amnesty's call."
"During the fighting in January, Amnesty documented Israeli forces engaging in "direct attacks on civilians and civilian objects in Gaza, and attacks which were disproportionate or indiscriminate." The leader of Amnesty International's fact-finding mission to the Gaza Strip and southern Israel noted how "Israeli forces used white phosphorus and other weapons supplied by the USA to carry out serious violations of international humanitarian law, including war crimes." Amnesty also reported finding fragments of U.S.-made munitions "littering school playgrounds, in hospitals and in people's homes."
I feel that I belong to a lost country when this sort of thing is happening in a world which should have learned some lessons from the many bloody wars that have been provoked; orchestrated or just plain decided upon – like Iraq!
I believe that the American government, heavily manipulated by the Zionist Lobby, cares little about International Laws or Human Rights when ever they don’t suit them.
Unfortunately, the views of the Zionists receive special treatment in Australia with a strange sort of inverted sense of “free speech” while at the same time, claiming to be part of the moral high ground.
If anyone in this day and age, believes that we Australians are isolated from the horrific abuses of human rights by the new Israelis, they are only adopting the pacifist attitude which always precedes a major conflict.
NE OUBLIE.
This post has been cross-posted to http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/ and http://www.webdiary.com.au/
Apologies.
ReplyDeleteMy posted site left out an extra t in fpiftxt - the address then is as follows:
http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/5923
Sorry,
Ern G.
I tend to agree with David G; Webdiary has had its day and I would suggest that the best bet would be for those that find it just too frustrating to deal with the likes of the fraudsters and liars Messrs Ramsey, Curran, Morrella, Pahoff, et al, to just withdraw from commenting there. This would then leave them high and dry with no one to argue with. Since they are incapable of constructive debate and use Webdiary simply as an anti-left pro-Zionist propaganda platform, Webdiary, since there would then be no one there to aim their propaganda at, would simply close up shop.
ReplyDeleteThere is, of course, a certain irony in that happening inasmuch that it was the right-wing that threatened to withdraw from Webdiary in the first place which caused most of the left to leave anyway. Once all of the left are gone from Webdiary then there’s nothing left for the Fraudsters and Liars to play with.
Personally I think Webdiary-Libre is a brilliant idea. Who cares what the likes of Reynolds, Tonkin and the others think. The important thing is to get the message out and debate issues that really matter without the distractions of having to go over and over the same old garbage that the right-wing continually regurgitated.
Webdiary is dead! Long live Webdiary-Libre!
it's like banging one's head against brickwork ...
ReplyDelete.. it feels good when you stop ...
.. g'day Damian
-=*=-
What I find excruciating, is to 'see' some so-called progressives continuing to feed known lying trolls, allowing the propagandists to appear to be 'debating' - but in reality just pouring forth ever more of their filth.
My suggestion: 1) identify troll/lies, 2) say so loudly, then 3) move on.-
[cross-posted _libre]
Like it or lump it?
ReplyDeleteLike the Federal Opposition and the crazy Senate, the Zionist apologists in WD are merely trying to unload the blame.
In my experience, the teaching of right and wrong was considered paramount by our parents of any nationality or religion, even before the three R's.
Before a matter is allowed to take up the time of the Court, there is a hearing sometimes called a mention. America has a similar system .
The right of the Zionists to do what they have done was wrong in legal and moral terms from the beginning, and that issue would not pass muster.
If however, the Australian High Court dealt with the situation in Gaza they would be obliged to accept on the evidence that legally, the Palestinians are firing home-made rockets into their own land and "devil take the hindmost" but, they are aware that they are endangering the invaders of the country.
However, the Zionist invasion and occupation of Palestinian lands has no value in morality or international law - the latter of which is denied by one of webdiary’s Zionists and I wish the Australian Jews would explain it to him.
I don't believe that Alan Curran is the vicious person his posts seem to portray but I am afraid that the goal of a new Israel has defied all elements of decency, beliefs in international law and the UN Charter of Human Rights.
In essence, this Palestinian invasion is an attack on the very basis of civilisation.
It is an interesting fact that only the powers that be support the Zionist's illegal invasion - as far as I can tell, the world experts in the fields of law and justice all condemn that action but then - they have no political or financial gain to be otherwise.
NE OUBLIE.
This has been cross-posted to http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/ and http://www.webdiary.com.au/
Looks like Fiona Reynolds or Richard Tonkin decided to censor your comment before publishing it on WD, Ernest.
ReplyDeleteDown the WD memory hole goes:
"Like the Federal Opposition and the crazy Senate, the Zionist apologists in WD are merely trying to unload the blame."
Down, down the WD memory hole goes:
".. the latter of which is denied by one of webdiary’s Zionists and I wish the Australian Jews would explain it to him."
Down, down, down the WD memory hole goes:
"I don't believe that Alan Curran is the vicious person his posts seem to portray but ..."
And so, Ern, a key point of your comment is cut.
Given the "Ethical, Transparent, Accountable" nature of WD, the relevant rules (unpublished of course) must be:
* Do not accuse Webdiary management of any bias or you will be censored, perhaps banned ... depending on how much we loathe correcting your your formatting and/or punctuation.
* If you point out that someone is a Zionist (even if you only point out someone actually using a pseudonym, such as "Alan Curran"), then we will censor you; whereas if he slanders you saying that you sympathise with Hamas terrorists (despite you simply siding with the innocent Palestinians in Hamas-controlled Gaza), then that's perfectly OK by us.
Wise of Ern to cross post, that way we can see what has gone down the WD hole. Not so wise of WD to overlook that fact. Perhaps Fiona is overworked and might be looking for a helping hand with the moderating. John Fuller might be a suitable candidate - in his first post he dredges up an old comment of Ern's from 2007 (at least he says so - the link doesn't work for me) with which to attack him.
ReplyDeleteI think we know who the censor is given a previous closely timed comment to Ern's one attracted the following editor's welcome:
ReplyDelete"Fiona: Welcome to Webdiary, John Fuller."
BTW, watch "John Fuller" show signs of being someone we've seen before taking shots at Ern over there.
Q. How many first comments over the years have come from someone who'd trawl back through WD archives to find and link to an old comment?
ReplyDeleteA. None, but that one.
It struck me as odd for a first comment. I think you are not the only one, Orana, who sees signs.
ReplyDeleteLook at who was attacking Ern when he had the courage to "Write for Webdiary" in 2007 about why he is a Labor man:
ReplyDelete"Alan Curran"
"L.Ferguson" - i.e. "Alan Curran"
"Eliot Ramsey"
It's abysmal.
ReplyDeleteTo think that Ern wrote this to conclude his debut WD article:
ReplyDelete"Without Margo’s Webdiary and the Management Team, where could any Australian today, find a place to really express their views? Certainly not in the Corporations’ media."
Now we know, sadly, Australians (or indeed anyone of any nationality) cannot really express their views on Webdiary, not if they're noting the Zionism of those like "Alan Curran", thanks the Management Team's memory hole.
Ern has learned the hard way what Webdiary has become. And is not the first to experience this.
ReplyDeleteLet's remember the Rome Statute. (Not printed in Webdiary)
ReplyDeletePaul Morella wrote in Webdiary: "There isn't of course any universally accepted "international law".
He should try Googling "States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court".
One interesting section is:
Israel voted against the adoption of the Rome Statute but later signed it for a short period.
In 2002, the United States and Israel, "unsigned" the Rome Statute, indicating that they no longer intend to become states parties and, as such, they have no legal obligations arising from their signature of the statute.
In 2002 Israel submitted a letter to the United Nations declaring that it did not intend to ratify the treaty, using identical wording as the United States.[16]
Israel states that it has "deep sympathy" with the goals of the court. However, it has concerns that political pressure on the court would lead it to reinterpret international law or to "invent new crimes". It cites the inclusion of "the transfer of parts of the civilian population of an occupying power into occupied territory" as a war crime as an example of this, whilst at the same time disagrees with the exclusion of terrorism and drug trafficking. Israel sees the powers given to the prosecutor as excessive and the geographical appointment of judges as disadvantaging Israel which is prevented from joining any of the UN Regional Groups.[17]
So Israel can do as it likes? And so can the US? And so can all of the non-signatories and those who have not ratified? Radical and rogue countries without any consideration for anyone else.
Then reason and logic would dictate that anyone can attack Israel and the US without fear of the International Criminal Court? No more active sympathy with 9/11’s or WW II?
Does this also mean that the actions of the Nazis was NOT an infringement of international law IF as Morella states - there isn't any such law!
And of course my old question remains unanswered - WHY should any of the ICC signatories even consider new Israel is a state of any kind?
NE OUBLIE.
This post will be cross-posted to http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/ and http://webdiary.com.au/
G'day Ern, here is a resource that will be useful:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.eisil.org/
Paul Morrella said on Webdiary.com.au
ReplyDelete"Any yahoo can quote their particular version of "international law", and on the net, they often do. Rarely if ever is it result-based.
The morals of any situation are of course an entirely different thing. Morals and law, my man, aint the same thing.
Jawing this law and that law is seemingly meaningless without results. I really don't know why people even bother."
Does this provocative statement deserve discussion? I believe that it does if only to point out the sub-human attitude of its author.
His attitude can be an explanation for the "Spanish Inquisition" - the "Rape of the Balkans" - the "Vandalising of Rome" and the "Holocaust".
To the best of my knowledge, all religions demand faith in their beliefs but, I know of none who advocate pre-emptive violence against another "civilisation" other than the "cult of Mount Zion".
The cavalier attitude of this person to the lack of need for laws and common civilised decency is a disgrace to all WD contributors.
It means - at least to me - that any posturing by this person with regard to any subject concerned with the victims of abuse of military power should be treated with the contempt it deserves.
Since he is an advocate of the absolute military power of new Israel against a concentration camp of disenfranchised citizens of their own country - then I demand that he apply the same principle to the holocaust or acknowledge that he is a liar and a hypocrite.
NE OUBLIE.
This post has been cross-posted with http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/ and http://www.webdiary-crippled.blogspot.com.au/
Richard Tonkin is active at WD but still no response to the questions put to him here. He seems bereft of the integrity required to defend his allegations. He prefers the coward's way of hiding behind WD's moderation wall where they either edit or refuse to publish Ern's posts. That does not prevent them from publishing as series attacks against Ern by the proven liar "Paul Morrella".
ReplyDeleteWD management are beneath contempt.
My post entitled "Paul Morrella said on webdiary com.au/" yesterday.
ReplyDeleteAny suggestions as to why?
NE OUBLIE.
Suicide of Israel?
ReplyDeleteThe more I read about as much of information available about new Israel - its intentions to steal land - its beginnings - its methods of dealing with the owners of the land stolen and the land they intend to steal - I have to say that my US media influenced opinion has been completely shattered.
IMHO this thread in Webdiary is forcing interested parties to take a good look at what is done - not what is said. This was also true of the Australian Jews who wrote the Gaza Media Statement for us to understand the difference between the "wheat and the chaff".
One such article is on http://fbc.binghamton.edu/249en.htm
I quote some interesting sections like:
"The state of Israel proclaimed its independence at midnight on May 15, 1948. The United Nations had voted to establish two states in what had been Palestine under British rule. The city of Jerusalem was supposed to be an international Zone under U.N. jurisdiction. The U.N. resolution had wide support, and specifically that of the United States and the Soviet Union. The Arab states all voted against it"
COMMENT: Sort of a democratic majority vote ignored, considering the number of Arab states who voted against it?
And: "In the sixty years of its existence, the state of Israel has depended for its survival and expansion on an overall strategy that combined three elements: macho militarism, geopolitical alliances, and public relations. The macho militarism (what current Prime Minister Ehud Olmert calls the "iron fist") was made possible by the nationalist fervour of Jewish Israelis, and eventually (although not initially) by the very strong support of Jewish communities elsewhere in the world".
COMMENT: Interesting that the intention from the beginning was to use the "iron fist" - now that's mediation Nazi style?
The author Immanuel Wallerstein, completed his commentary with:
"The three-element strategy of Israel is decomposing. The iron fist no longer succeeds, much as it didn't for George Bush in Iraq. Will the United States link remain firm? I doubt it. And will world public opinion continue to look sympathetically on Israel? It seems not. Can Israel now switch to an alternative strategy, of negotiating with the militant representatives of the Arab Palestinians, as an integral constituent of the Middle East, and not as an outpost of Europe? It seems quite late for that, quite possibly too late. Hence, the chronicle of suicide foretold."
COMMENT: Should any resolution to this land-grab be considered, it would be nice if the powers that be listened to the much aggrieved indigenous peoples. Perhaps they don't want wannabe westerners to control their lives?
NE OUBLIE. This post has been cross-posted with The more I read about as much of information available about new Israel - its intentions to steal land - its beginnings - its methods of dealing with the owners of the land stolen and the land they intend to steal - I have to say that my US media influenced opinion has been completely shattered.
IMHO this thread in Webdiary is forcing interested parties to take a good look at what is done - not what is said. This was also true of the Australian Jews who wrote the Gaza Media Statement for us to understand the difference between the "wheat and the chaff".
One such article is on http://fbc.binghamton.edu/249en.htm
I quote some interesting sections like:
"The state of Israel proclaimed its independence at midnight on May 15, 1948. The United Nations had voted to establish two states in what had been Palestine under British rule. The city of Jerusalem was supposed to be an international Zone under U.N. jurisdiction. The U.N. resolution had wide support, and specifically that of the United States and the Soviet Union. The Arab states all voted against it"
COMMENT: Sort of a democratic majority vote ignored considering the number of Arab states who voted?
And: "In the sixty years of its exist4nce, the state of Israel has depended for its survival and expansion on an overall strategy that combined three elements: macho militarism, geopolitical alliances, and public relations. The macho militarism (what current Prime Minister Ehud Olmert calls the "iron fist") was made possible by the nationalist fervour of Jewish Israelis, and eventually (although not initially) by the very strong support of Jewish communities elsewhere in the world".
COMMENT: Interesting that the intention from the beginning was to use the "iron fist" - now that's mediation Nazi style?
The author Immanuel Wallerstein, completed his commentary with:
"The three-element strategy of Israel is decomposing. The iron fist no longer succeeds, much as it didn't for George Bush in Iraq. Will the United States link remain firm? I doubt it. And will world public opinion continue to look sympathetically on Israel? It seems not. Can Israel now switch to an alternative strategy, of negotiating with the militant representatives of the Arab Palestinians, as an integral constituent of the Middle East, and not as an outpost of Europe? It seems quite late for that, quite possibly too late. Hence, the chronicle of suicide foretold."
COMMENT: Should any resolution to this land-grab be considered, it would be nice if the powers that be listened to the much aggrieved indigenous peoples. Perhaps they don't want wannabe westerners to control their lives?
NE OUBLIE.
This post has been cross-posted with http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/ and http://www.webdiary.com.au/
G'day Ern, the WD team would point to some of the language in your post - one example is that it is like parliament in that you cannot call anyone a liar, even if he is.There would be other excuses if you asked and they bothered to answer.
ReplyDeleteHowever, bottom line is that WD is corrupt and some people are given leeway (and protection) not allowed to others.
Apologies for duplication.
ReplyDeleteDue to the stringent requirements of Webdiary I try to correct my spelling and grammar errors by copying and saving so that I can post later.
In my post entitled "Suicide of Israel" I repeated myself in the final draft.
Sorry for that folks - still learning.
NE OUBLIE
G'day ID.
ReplyDeleteSounds like good news mate on your e-mail - let's hope so.
My disgust in Webdiary has reached an all time low.
When I try to log on - it is refused.
When I try for a new account - it is refused.
When my Wife applies using our e-mail address - it is refused.
Nevertheless, I have a feeling of freedom in that I have an alternative where I can really exercise my right to free speech without being crucified by pompous arseholes.
Why, (my favourite word) didn’t these people have the intestinal fortitude to write openly in Webdiary that they have disenfranchised me - and my Wife - and provide some courtesy of an explanation? Why? Because in their book of absolute control - they don't have to. Decency is for the lower classes.
Now there's a reason to explain the hidden and absolute power in webdiary which epitomizes the Zionist control mantra.
The only reason that I have fallen foul of the powers that be is that I believe - no - I KNOW that the Zionists of new Israel, and those who control so much of western civilisation (by being un-civilised) could even have their claws into the management of webdiary. Another point is inescapable - Margo must know and agree or at least permit it. That’s sad.
Since the Australian Jews exposed this Gaza matter, at least to me, I have learned a lot regarding the reasons that ALL Jews can be hated and very unfairly, for the unmitigated arrogance of the Zionists and their absolute need for power and wealth.
Where is the separation? Why can't we talk about the holocaust? Why is it a god-like subject? The Russians lost 20 million people in WW II - how many of them were Jews and, are they counted in the alleged 6 million?
If so, that is double counting in my book. And why do I think that is important? Because I believe in truth and at the very least the fine tuning of propaganda.
It is scary to an old time believer in the western civilisation to find out that there is a monster, born in the deserts of Canaan and Jebus, that has developed so much power that people even forget that their ancestors were desert nomads, no better than the Arabs they hate. They have now, in new Israel, obtained a secret and powerful nuclear launching pad for any type of conquest against defenceless peoples as they may choose. A frightening thought.
It is here! It is powerful in our internet and our T/V - it could even be part of the Howard sedition laws. And is subscribed to by people who are not even fair dinkum enough to declare their real names.
Don't these people realise that some of us, who they consider are not as well educated as monkeys, can think and reason that the principle of the holocaust is history? And that that sort of behaviour should not be forgotten nor tolerated – even in Gaza?
NE OUBLIE.
Again I faulter due to anger and indignity.
ReplyDeleteMy last post was cross-posted to http://yourdemocracy.net.au/
NE OUBLIE.
G'day Ern,
ReplyDelete.. you have my deepest sympathy. Your 'powers that be' is my kleptocracy; our democracy - as your freedom of speech 'over there' - has been stolen.
I mentioned Camus' essay "The Myth of Sisyphus" the other day, the essay concludes,
"The struggle itself...is enough to fill a man's heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy."
I found this recently, it fits as well:
'Virtue herself is her own fairest reward.'
-=*=-
What we do here in _libre is to seek then expose the lies the kleptocracy force upon us, and replace those lies with the truth as we find it. If that is uncomfortable for them 'over there' - and it obviously is, as specifically proven by their disgraceful treatment of you - well, it shows them up for what they are.
I once had a thread on Margo Kingston's webdiary called "The Senate". Unfortunately it died due to lack of oxygen.
ReplyDeleteThe latest performance of the hostile Senate is as unreasonable as I have previously argued.
The Liberal Opposition doesn't have any plan or ideas concerning the massive financial disaster caused by the extreme capitalists in the US, nor do they have any concern about the difficulties that the western world is suffering due to their counterparts in America.
But, once again the powers that be (the media) protects their exponents of "have and have nots" by excusing the most grubby and un-Australian behaviour by all Senators on the cross benches.
Those people who were elected only by their State - to represent only their State - have been given an opportunity by the Liberal/National neo-capitalists to take advantage of the horrendous downturn in the world's economic turmoil to sabotage the democratically elected Government of Australia for the sole selfish purpose of trying to impress that they "know better". Or, urged on by the Liberals – here is a chance where a country is on its knees and the government is unable to function without the support of the Xenothons; the Fieldings and the hypocritical Bob Browns.
I not only criticise Xenothon for his "put my views first" (for his constituents in every State?) in the absolute abuse of Section 7 of the Constitution but then using his undemocratic power to have his own way irrespective of the effect on the general public - not even in his State.
Likewise, the foolish Liberalised Fielding is having a "field day" so much so that now he doesn't know where he is.
Just imagine - a popularly elected Australian government is unable to function without the support of selfish individuals (including Bob Brown) who put their own political futures ahead of the welfare of our nation.
Whatever happens, the Liberals should never be able to live down the fact that in these extreme times, caused by whoever, they have undermined every attempt by our Government to soften the blow of extreme capitalism on our population.
Bob Brown has said "the government takes the Senate for granted". Now there is an example of a person who has gained seats and power in the Senate. Struth.
Xenothon gains the support of the capitalist media by being a well-spoken power-crazed individual.
Fielding - Fielding - what can we say? In support of the alcohol industry he kills the legislation which was a major step in the direction of his hypocritical claim of caring for teen-drinkers. Fair dinkum.
If for no other reason, I suggest that this forum looks at the Constitution and wonders why the Senate doesn't function as it was intended.
NE OUBLIE.
This will be cross-posted with http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/
Found this blog at last.
ReplyDeleteNo Justice for the Palestinians.
Yet another President of the world’s biggest terrorist country is bringing together the Zionist murdering invaders, (who occupy almost the entire Palestinian sovereign land) and the gutless Mahmoud Abbas (another US plant) who has consistently allowed the “Jewish settlers” to calmly take over the West Bank along with armed Police stations. Fair dinkum!
This is what the US/Zionist lobby would have you believe is a genuine attempt – NOT for justice – oh no - but for peace. Who ever believes these terrorists does so at their peril.
Never mind the Alamo – remember the reasons the US has lied to the world to obtain enough customers for their massive Military/Corporate! Vietnam; Afghanistan; Iraq and now they are eying off Iran at the behest of their unholy ally, Zionist Israel.
Two bandit partners in attacking sovereign nations whenever they need to use more weapon technology or; they want oil or; they want to destroy cities so that the Cheney mob Haliburton can rebuild the destroyed 10,000 year old “temples of history” – and replace it with expensive but suspect structure of the US mould. What did that criminal Rumsfeld often say? “That is the old world”. Well now we must get rid of that mustn’t we? Struth – how many times will we accept these contradictions? The old world is the basis for the claims of the Zionists – isn’t it?
Everything the US/Zionists have done has been to allow the murder of the Palestinians, the displacement of their people in starving “concentration camps” while, they ravage the land and build massive monuments to their successful fascism.
A simple question – why should the Palestinian owners of the land even consider any peace with the neo-Nazis who have tortured them for more than 60 years? Is rewarding fascism and Nazi methods the way to a just and lasting peace? The Zionist murderers have taken us back to the middle ages where the empires took what they wanted because they were powerful enough.
Perhaps the Hamas and Hezbollah have very good reasons to refuse to accept the crumbs that the Zionists MAY allow them in return for the invaders to cease (however temporarily) the murders of their countrymen and women? Or do the nuclear armed Zionists have another “Lieberman” idea for them?
There is very little to cheer about. God bless Australia. NE OUBLIE.
Obama drags Netanyahu, Abbas to the table
ReplyDelete.. I'm supposing you mean this story ...
.. lots of bluster - and bluff ...
.. trying to hinder any progress - g'day Ern
-=*=-
Obama drags Netanyahu, Abbas to the table
By Middle East correspondent Ben Knight for AM
Posted September 23, 2009 07:17:00
«"I've asked the Prime Minister and the President to continue these intensive discussions by sending their teams back to Washington next week. And I've asked the Secretary of State to report to me on the status of these negotiations in mid October."
This is as tough as an American president has ever talked on this issue, especially with Israel. But already, Mr Netanyahu has shown he is prepared to call the President's bluff.
Last night on Lateline, the former US ambassador to Israel, Martin Indyk, explained why Mr Obama's task will be so tough.
"He stands in Israeli public opinion polls at around 6 per cent and falling," he said.
"Netanyahu stands at around 60 per cent and rising and that's a situation in which the President cannot succeed in achieving Middle East peace unless he brings the Israeli people with him."»
[AusBC/justin, ibid.]
-=*=-
Of course the US would be capable of bringing Netanyahu and the rest of the (criminal, murdering for land-theft) Zs to heel; all the US'd have to do - say, would be to stop arming the (totally illegal, immoral) Z-state.
We'll all be watching this one, to see if the tiny, illegitimate tail (0.1% world's pop in Z-rael, same in so-called 'Diaspora') really can wag the 'new' president of the rabid US dog.
-=*end*=-
PS As well as not arming the Z-criminals, *force* them to give back *all* the land they stole from the pre-'47/8 legitimate owner/occupiers, natch.
G'day Ern and ID. And the progress so far? From DemocravcyNow!.
ReplyDeleteUri Avnery.
NO POINT denying it: in the first round of the match between Barack Obama and Binyamin Netanyahu, Obama was beaten.
Obama had demanded a freeze of all settlement activity, including East Jerusalem, as a condition for convening a tripartite summit meeting, in the wake of which accelerated peace negotiations were to start, leading to peace between two states – Israel and Palestine.
In the words of the ancient proverb, a journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step. Netanyahu has tripped Obama on his first step. The President of the United States has stumbled.
Not a good start.